Search for: "B. Smith"
Results 4641 - 4660
of 5,332
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2009, 6:36 am
Wendell Smith, Defendant-Appellant.2009 WL 588950(N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 1:18 am
Smith (html format) still has something to teach us about annulments in Indiana.First, the facts: On January 30, 1991, Leslie and Michelle participated in a marriage ceremony in Boone County, Kentucky. [read post]
8 Mar 2009, 11:20 am
(BTW, we need to come up with a novel adjective, something other than black: Black was Thursday, Monday, and Tuesday in the stock market crash of 1929; and Black Friday connotes retail profits in the shopping day after Thanksgiving.)At Adam Smith, Esq., Bruce MacEwen writes about the "The Great Deleveraging" of biglaw. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 1:22 pm
Rostolsky, Jacqueline B. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 9:25 pm
Smith Industries Ltd.) dealing with the issue of pain and suffering in a BC motor vehicle collision tort claim. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 8:33 pm
I think they may also have had a larger stock of civic-minded gentlemen, though this is harder to say (Arthur Watkins and Margaret Chase Smith probably count; anonymous characters like Norris Cotton; probably Ralph Flanders though he may be a closer case). [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 4:33 pm
So the Court considered Doherty and the gateway (b) defence. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 12:26 pm
Tortu.There's also a fascinating debate between the majority (Judge Hug) and the dissent (Judge Randy Smith) about the ability of the district court to grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 4:58 am
With water reported to be about 61-degrees, Schulyer likely survived because a) he had on a life jacket and b) he stayed with the boat. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 12:27 am
Seabury and Smith Inc. [read post]
26 Feb 2009, 4:02 am
Art 37.07(3) and Art. 42.12(5)(b), in that the court did not hear the initial plea and failed to conduct a presentence investigation or allow for the presentation of evidence in mitigation of punishment.For a summary of the underlying case, click here.Robert Lee Meneffe v. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 2:45 pm
FM-11-905-08-B (N.J. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 11:09 pm
(Colgate, WI) Giunta, Francis (Hartford, WI) Zapushek, John B. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 6:42 pm
Smith, “Do the Experts Mean What Their Metaphors Say? [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 9:13 am
The law does not eliminate the possibility of eventual jail time for the Class A and B offenses covered - if convicted, a defendant could still get six months in jail for a class B offense, or up to a year for class A. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 8:10 am
Fisch Professor of Law University of Pennsylvania Law School Merritt B. [read post]
23 Feb 2009, 11:25 am
AdLaw By Request is Reed Smith's fifth addition to a stable of LexBlog blogs. [read post]
19 Feb 2009, 12:14 pm
His Lordship felt there were three basic propositions of law to consider and apply: (a) it was not enough to give rise to a duty of care that harm was foreseeable (Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office [1970] AC 1004); (b) the law did not ordinarily impose positive duties to protect others (Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd 1987 SC (HL) 37; (c) the law did not impose a duty to prevent a person being harmed by a criminal act of a third party merely because such harm was foreseeable… [read post]
19 Feb 2009, 6:54 am
B. [read post]
18 Feb 2009, 6:28 am
Smith joined by Reavley and Tallman) affirmed. [read post]
